If I need one quarterback to win a game for me tomorrow, I'm not picking Aaron Rodgers. He is statistically great in the regular season with an arsenal of weapons around him, but I wouldn't characterize him as a "big game" QB. He and the Packers had a phenomenal run in 2010 on their way to the Super Bowl, but outside of that he has been very similar to Peyton Manning in terms of playoff success (1-3) and that lone victory came against a Joe Webb led Vikings squad. I'm not hating on Aaron, just pointing out the facts.

and yet its been a decade since hes gotten a ring, but what has he done? oh hes dazzled in the regular season and come up short in the playoffs....just like your reasoning for not taking rodgers or manning, both of whom have a ring more recently than brady

and yet its been a decade since hes gotten a ring, but what has he done? oh hes dazzled in the regular season and come up short in the playoffs....just like your reasoning for not taking rodgers or manning, both of whom have a ring more recently than brady

Brady has 3 rings, been to the big game 5 times, and he's been to the AFC title game the last two season (referencing recent history).

Let me give you a hypothetical...how would Tom Brady do if he were able to throw to Jennings, Nelson, Jones, Cobb, and Finley? what if Rodgers and Brady switched places?

I don't think enough weight is placed on the surrounding talent a QB has/is working with.

A case point is Matt Ryan/Phillip Rivers. Ryan's playing with two top 10 WR's and a Top 5 TE. Phillip Rivers is playing with an over the hill TE and 1 WR that has any business in the league. Two years ago you could have made a strong arguement to put Rivers top 5 when he had outstanding group of offensive talent around him. Now - we are talking top 15. Now, Matt Ryan makes a strong case as the #5 guy. But is he really better than Phillip Rivers?

I hate grading QB's after their first year too. Let's see how well Kaepernick, RGIII, Russell and Luck play after a year of film is build on them. One or two may stay strong but I doubt we would be talking about all four as a top 12 guys next year.

I don't think enough weight is placed on the surrounding talent a QB has/is working with.

A case point is Matt Ryan/Phillip Rivers. Ryan's playing with two top 10 WR's and a Top 5 TE. Phillip Rivers is playing with an over the hill TE and 1 WR that has any business in the league. Two years ago you could have made a strong arguement to put Rivers top 5 when he had outstanding group of offensive talent around him. Now - we are talking top 15. Now, Matt Ryan makes a strong case as the #5 guy. But is he really better than Phillip Rivers?

I hate grading QB's after their first year too. Let's see how well Kaepernick, RGIII, Russell and Luck play after a year of film is build on them. One or two may stay strong but I doubt we would be talking about all four as a top 12 guys next year.

That's not a bad point. But making those around him better is part of the ranking. But yea, Rivers gets no help. Sanchez either. I just don't like to downgrade guys for utilizing talent around him well (Ryan). So it's tough to do the opposite even though the idea is correct. I don't know how I'd incorporate it into the %s. Bottom line speaks in these rankings. Every situation is different, some may be more challenging, but 2012 performance is the most important piece of the pie. Rivers did not play well. That doesn't tell the whole story but it's unfair to the others to grade him on a curve. By the same token - Carolina's coaching was terrible. Should I upgrade Newton for that? No.

These rankings are always going to be fluid. The point isn't to predict how they'll ultimately end up. It's to show a current landscape of the position. I fully expect the list to be different next year.

As for your point about the four youngsters, I disagree. There is no reason to expect any of them to regress by much. They all have parts of their games they can actually improve and while other teams have film on them - their experience and knowledge has grown and will continue to grow - giving them a mental edge, Xs and Os edge, and preparation edge they didn't have as rookies.

I could buy an argument about RGIII's running style leading to chronic injuries, but I took injuries almost completely out of this discussion because it gets real tricky when you add them into the equation.

Alex Smith- 41.6 (Could be higher but trajectory is low and being benched midseason hurts)

Carson Palmer- 40.3 (Living off past glories. Should be lower)

Ryan Tannehill- 37.8 (Trajectory and arm talent seperate him from the guys lower)

Ryan Fitzpatrick- 35.1

Nick Foles- 33.5 (I like him more than most, so trajectory is higher than others might rank it)

Michael Vick- 32.7

Mark Sanchez- 28.0 (Sure 2012 was awful, but making the AFC Championship a few times helps)

Tim Tebow- 27.0 (Clutch and scrambling ability helped A LOT)

Jake Locker- 25.7

Kevin Kolb- 23.7

Blaine Gabbert- 22.6

Brandon Weeden- 20.5

Chad Henne- 17.6

Ryan Mallett- 15.7 (Could he be higher? Sure. But 2012 season and career to date are non-existant. And how can we judge decision making and intangibles if he never plays?)

Matt Flynn- 10.2 (Like Mallett, not playing in 2012 kills his number. Having less arm talent and a lower ceiling give Mallett the advantage over him)

Im not understanding how Brees is so low on this... Dudes going to go down as (statistically) a Top 5 QB with team success, the intangibles, decision making, accuracy, etc... Maybe a homer but I dont understand how 3 or 4 of those guys above him are... well, above him.

Im not understanding how Brees is so low on this... Dudes going to go down as (statistically) a Top 5 QB with team success, the intangibles, decision making, accuracy, etc... Maybe a homer but I dont understand how 3 or 4 of those guys above him are... well, above him.

But I can say he is #4

It is mostly because 2012 was weighted so heavily. Brees threw a lot of yards but he also had a bunch on INTs and missed the playoffs. Guys like Rodgers, Flacco, Ryan, Luck, and Eli have a better trajectory as well.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolidGold

Bortlezzzzzzz

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monomach

Brilliant letting one of Scott Pioli's henchmen have his own team to ruin. One of the premier GM jobs in the NFL and it gets handed to a stupid **** who makes three facepalm moves for every good one. Awesome. Just like handing a new Mercedes to a 16 year old girl who's already been in three wrecks.

*When you add everything up together the question that this list answers is this: Which QB would you rather have right now, today, to play one game, assuming full health and ideal circumstances in terms of offense and supporting cast for that player. How much time to prepare, what exactly the made up opponent would be, and if the question is changed to 'for one full season' should not affect the ranking.

Right, because I've been the frontman endorser when talking about Alex Smith during his entire tenure with the 49ers, or even within the last two years.

Because that's what I said, right? I said I am waiting on your list that puts Alex Smith in the top 15 which you've already made numerous points that he is, correct? I don't see the point in going to a completely different scenario that has nothing to do with what I said, or this thread.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Wright

I guarantee that if someone picks Cam Newton in the Top 5 they will regret it.

I'd say it was implied with the tone of your response. When did I say I was making a list anyways?

And notice my first response to the OP regarding this thread was about Wilson being ranked higher. Didn't say anything regarding his ranking here with Smith. If I was so pro "top 15" then I probably would have contested the ranking. I usually put quarterbacks in groups anyway. Maybe I said Smith was a top 15 QB at one point? I don't remember it being recently.